Martin Adams, an experienced project leader at David's Software Ltd., a medium-sized software house, has been appointed project leader for the development of an advanced help desk software system for a leading home appliance maintenance service. This is the 12th help desk system developed by his department in the last three years.
The current project is somewhat special with respect to its timetable. The contract with the customers was signed six days after submission of the proposal, and the development team is scheduled to begin working at full capacity, with eight team members, 10 days later. The contract offers a significant early completion bonus for each week below 26 weeks, but determines high late completion penalties for each week after 30 weeks.
In a meeting with his superior, Adams claims that the comprehensive proposal documentation "as is", which has been thoroughly checked by the contract review team, should serve as the project's development and quality plans. His superior does not agree with him and demands that he immediately prepares comprehensive project and quality plans, according to company procedures.
Do you agree with Adams? If yes, list the arguments that support his claim.
Do you agree with his superior? If yes, list the arguments that support the superior's claim.
Considering the circumstances of the project, what, in your opinion, should be done in this case?
Comparing the circumstances described here to those of the opening anecdote, are there any justifications for different recommendations?